The Joint Light Tactical Vehicle (JLTV) program is one of the first to implement DOD’s competitive prototyping policy. Established in 2007, the policy stipulates that two or more competing original equipment manufacturers (OEMs) must produce prototypes to reduce risk, maximize performance, decrease costs and synchronize requirements. Simply put, this means that in addition to the normal test objectives and issues, all JLTV OEM vehicle prototypes were required to be tested consistently, fairly and separately.

The JLTV program’s engineering and manufacturing development (EMD) phase concluded in late 2014 after an aggressive, 14-month test schedule specifically intended to generate data sufficient to inform the Source Selection Evaluation Board (SSEB) and the capability production document (CPD) development, and provide data for the Milestone C (MS C) decision. Each of the many testing categories contained numerous subtests addressing requirements and required diligent management to avoid costly “test creep”—unplanned and unfunded test data requirements identified after the start of test execution. Simply put, test creep adds risk—in cost, schedule and performance—to programs and can delay or even end an otherwise successful program. Successfully avoiding these impacts to the program’s tight schedule and budget required detailed planning and budgeting, careful management and control, and constant communication with a diversity of stakeholders: the U.S. Army Test and Evaluation Command (ATEC); the Office of the Secretary of Defense’s director of operational test and evaluation; the deputy assistant secretary of defense for developmental test and evaluation; the Marine Corps Operational Test and Evaluation Activity (MCOTEA); and Army and Marine Corps combat developers. The JLTV program yielded a number of lessons learned that will be shared with other programs employing a competitive prototyping strategy.

The tight schedule and extensive EMD testing, combined with heel-to-toe vehicle testing, required JLTV Product Manager for Test (PdM Test) team to thoroughly understand when to push back on test creep. For example, simply asking what the program and stakeholders would gain by conducting more testing, and then showing the corresponding low return on investment was sometimes what stood between staying on schedule and under budget, and creating program schedule and cost overruns.

There were instances when test creep was a reality, and no amount of discussion could put or keep it at bay. Weeks of assertive back-and-forth dialogue on the test and evaluation master plan (TEMP) were spent on “in the weeds” details. The program office’s position emphasized that those details should have been included in a detailed test plan (DTP), as opposed to the TEMP, in which they are considered binding regardless of any risk-benefit analysis.

The key to this effort focused on striking a balance and obtaining stakeholder buy-in to what is too much, which could cause program failure resulting from restrictive wording, and what is not enough, which could cause future funding issues. Requirements management is the program’s foundation. This foundation must be rock-solid without allowing test creep to erode it.

ACQUISITION TRAILBLAZER The JLTV program is one of the first to implement DOD’s competitive prototyping policy, which stipulates that two or more competing OEMs must produce prototypes to reduce risk, maximize performance, decrease costs and synchronize requirements. (Image courtesy of the Program Executive Office for Combat Support and Combat Service Support)

EMD PLANNING
In planning for JLTV EMD, the program team had to clearly understand what we were providing the warfighter and the risks associated with building it. Each test category contained numerous subtests addressing specific requirements. For example, automotive performance testing included soft-soil mobility, sand-slope traversing, braking, steering and handling, ride quality, fording, fuel consumption, top speed, acceleration, grades and slopes, as well as several other tests. Ballistic testing required additional test assets at the subsystem level (nine armored chassis plus numerous armor coupons or armor samples) in addition to the 27 system-level test assets included in the 66 test assets overall.

Test planning and DTP development were a several-month endeavor that involved multiple draft revisions, requiring weekly (and often daily) communication between the test-site subject-matter experts and our PdM Test team.

PdM Test emphasized a collaborative effort among JLTV PdM Test, ATEC’s U.S. Army Evaluation Center (AEC), MCOTEA and the various test sites, which ensured an appropriate balance between adequately testing the requirement and over-testing.

AEC’s data source matrix (DSM) defined the data that AEC and MCOTEA (the evaluators) needed to assess the JLTVs’ effectiveness, suitability and survivability. As such, DTP development focused on the testing needed to provide this data. The JLTV purchase description added test data requirements above the DSM, as it was determined to be critical for the SSEB. Subsequently, those requirements were also included in the DTPs.

This process also ensured that all stakeholders shared a common understanding of the test procedures, mitigating test creep caused by miscommunication on how requirements were to be tested. Given test program cost and schedule constraints, the Joint Program Office (JPO) JLTV, in coordination with stakeholders, determined which requirements did not need to be tested and could be evaluated through other means. Therefore, a requirements prioritization based on DSM data needs, as well as CDD-driven tier-level criteria (e.g., key performance parameters, key systems attributes versus others) provided guiding factors.

Once the DTP drafts were complete, it was imperative that other stakeholders, such as systems engineering, logistics and the JPO product directors—organ­izations responsible for managing each respective EMD OEM—review the documents to ensure that their respective concerns were addressed.

Test execution, to a greater extent than test planning, required constant interaction of the JPO JLTV, PdM Test, logistics, the budget management office, systems engineering, product directors and the test sites. Daily test update briefs (TUBs) and daily written test status reports ensured that all stakeholders were aware of current test status, which enabled timely identification and mitigation of test-related issues. Weekly test-site test-completion updates were also an important element in managing the test schedule.

THOROUGH ANALYSIS JLTV’s PdM Test team records vehicle weight during the limited user test. The program’s EMD phase concluded late last year after an aggressive, 14-month test schedule, with 300 test team members collecting data at 17 test sites. (Photo courtesy of JPO JLTV)

THREAT NEUTRALIZED
Efforts to minimize test creep began early in the test planning stages. By limiting testing to those test events needed to produce data to satisfy DSM needs, the JPO reduced extraneous testing from the test plans. PdM Test monitored test progress (versus schedule) on a daily basis, which enabled decisions regarding retest of failed items after corrective actions were implemented versus adhering to the test schedule and proceeding to the next test event. These were typically case-by-case decisions dependent on several factors based on priority (requirement priority, e.g., key performance parameter or not, test duration, etc.) The TUBs ensured that everyone, including PdM Test leadership, had all of the facts before providing guidance.

Ballistic testing was one of the test program’s big success stories in demonstrating how early planning eliminated any push for test creep. The team successfully reduced testing by understanding requirements and worked closely with the live fire integrated product team to reduce shots where OEM designs made reductions feasible. This abbreviated the test schedule and reduced cost. Deferring certain testing to the low-rate initial production phase, to be conducted on a single OEM, resulted in additional cost avoidance.

CONCLUSION
The JLTV EMD phase’s success can be attributed to open communication within the program office and among all stakeholders, a solid understanding of the risks the JLTV program faced, constant risk management and mitigation, and test-creep control. PdM Test successfully achieved EMD test phase objectives, ensured that requirements were tested, and provided the program with the necessary data to support the SSEB, CPD development, and ultimately, the JLTV MS C decision. PdM Test successfully managed and oversaw the execution of a complex test program that enabled implementation of the competitive prototyping policy with all three OEMs, all while remaining on schedule and under budget. The JLTV program promises to yield a number of lessons that can be leveraged by similar programs with a competitive-prototyping strategy.

Those same principles must be applied in JLTV’s next phase. We learned from the last phase that we cannot buckle to each want and whim, as doing so can be detrimental to the program. We must consider and balance each request and maintain constant awareness of the planned end state. Late-game test creep will only slow or halt what has been, to date, a very successful program.

Test programs cannot be developed without planning, budgeting and communication. Once developed, they must be managed, constantly communicated and controlled. Test creep cannot be allowed to create havoc; testing must be conducted to address a specific requirement and must consider risk.

PdM Test and the JPO JLTV (consisting of engineers, logisticians and quality assurance, budgeting and contracting personnel) are reviewing and assessing the EMD phase test results to better understand areas of performance risk, and will provide ATEC with recommendations to improve test efficiency and effectiveness. PdM Test’s goal is to maximize test efficiency and effectiveness during the production phase by eliminating redundant testing—analyzing risk and target tests accordingly—as well as employing test design techniques to ensure efficiency in producing statistically significant and defensible test results. EMD phase lessons learned in all functional areas within the JPO JLTV will be carried over into the production phase beginning in this fiscal year’s fourth quarter to ensure successful program execution.

THE RIGHT CHOICE To test three prototypes during the JLTV program’s EMD phase, Soldiers and Marines participated in a training exercise facilitated by the U.S. Army Operational Test Command on Fort Stewart, GA, in October 2014. (Photo courtesy of JPO JLTV)

LTC MISTY L. MARTIN is the PdM for test, JPO JLTV. She holds an M.A. in defense management and B.A. degrees in psychology and sociology. She has served in several ground vehicle assignments, including with the Project Management Office for Stryker as the assistant PdM for command, control, communications, computers, intelligence, surveillance and reconnaissance and as the PM forward in Afghanistan, and with the U.S. Army Special Operations Command as the Special Mission Units systems acquisition manager for weapons and vehicles. She is Level III certified in program management and Level I certified in test, systems planning, research, development and engineering (SPRDE) and science and technology, and is a member of the Army Acquisition Corps (AAC).

MS. DANIELLE WAYDA is the senior test lead within PdM Test for JPO JLTV. She holds an M.S. in engineering management from Oakland University and a B.S. in mechanical engineering from Lawrence Technological University. A member of the AAC, she is Level III certified in SPRDE and Level II certified in test and program management.

MR. STEVE MARTIN plans and executes testing events as the JPO JLTV Army developmental test/operational test (DT/OT) test lead for PdM Test. He holds an M.S. in hazardous waste management from Wayne State University and a B.S. in engineering chemistry from Oakland University. He is Level III certified in SPRDE, Level II certified in test and Level I certified in production, quality and manufacturing. He is also certified as a Quality Engineer by the American Society for Quality.

MR. JOSH PAGEL provides contract support for Booz Allen Hamilton Inc. and currently supports JPO JLTV as the DT/OT test engineer. He holds an M.E. in mechanical and aerospace engineering from the University of Virginia and earned a B.S. in mechanical engineering from the University of Michigan. He has spent more than 17 years supporting Army and Marine Corps tactical ground vehicle development, with nearly 10 of those years in the test and evaluation field.

Disclaimer: Reference herein to any specific commercial company, product, process or service by trade name, trademark, manufacturer or otherwise does not necessarily constitute or imply its endorsement, recommendation or favoring by the U.S. government or the DA. The opinions of the authors expressed herein do not necessarily state or reflect those of the U.S. government or the DA, and shall not be used for advertising or product endorsement purposes.

This article was originally published in the July – September 2015 issue of Army AL&T magazine.
Subscribe to Access AL&T is the premier online news source for the Acquisition, Logistics, and Technology (AL&T) Workforce. Subscribe

FORT BELVOIR, Va. (July 16, 2015) – For the Army Acquisition Workforce, education is a key component of career development and, ultimately, mission success for the warfighter. Armywide, thousands of Soldiers and civilians are involved in professional education programs, making the Army’s educational enterprise one of the largest academic systems in the United States. Last month, the Army announced The Army University—a multiyear plan to bolster its educational offerings by aligning most of its military education programs under a unified academic structure.

A February 2015 white paper from LTG Robert B. Brown, commanding general of the Combined Arms Center, spelled out the research behind the effort, which indicated that the Army’s current system—largely unchanged for two decades—is inadequate to address the complex challenges outlined in the Army Operating Concept, which calls for a flexible professional military education process that’s focused on educating leaders. The education effort within the U.S. Army Training and Doctrine Command (TRADOC) today includes 70-plus schools and several independent research libraries. Bureaucratic stovepipes often restrict the sharing of best practices across the education enterprise. Additionally, degrees and credentials from Army academic institutions carry less weight and prestige in the broader academic community, in part as a result of misunderstanding of the accreditation process within the military and a view that Army education lacks the academic rigor found in civilian programs.

The new system will align the officer, warrant officer, non-commissioned officer and civilian education programs across TRADOC under a single academic structure with a consistent brand name. The alignment will streamline academic governance, reduce stovepipes, facilitate accreditation and increase avenues for quickly sharing best practices. In addition, the Army University will increase collaboration and the sharing of best practices. Once fully implemented, the Army University concept is expected to yield increased numbers of Army courses with nationally-recognized accreditation; increase the number of Army education experiences that result in college credits or trade certifications; raise instructor credentials; and normalize many core courses across educational opportunities.

The Army University will encompass all U.S. Army training and command schools, and address the educational needs of the Army while providing individual Soldiers and civilians the opportunity to accomplish their own respective academic goals. The Army War College will be an integral part of the Army University but will maintain separate accreditation and governance.

The Army’s goal with the reorganized university structure is to maximize educational opportunities for Soldiers by providing valid academic credit for the education and experience they receive while on active duty. The Army will benefit in the form of reduced tuition assistance expenses, and Soldiers will benefit from better capability to transition into quality employment opportunities once they leave active duty.

The Army University is scheduled to roll out in the third quarter of FY15, and is slated to reach initial operating capability by the first quarter of FY16. Over the next two years, the Army University will develop new processes to facilitate student and faculty collaboration and exchanges with civilian universities, establish universal transcripts, centralize and improve faculty development programs, and implement common core curriculum across the spectrum of Army education.

A crew of four combat engineers is buttoned up in a Medium Mine Protected Vehicle (MMPV) Type II, moving down the road in search of suspected explosive hazards, with a mission to ensure that the route is safe for a convoy to travel. Each crew member has a set mission and, other than the driver, each is most likely using an enabler or sensor to help find the hazards. Each Soldier can only see what that sensor displays, requiring him or her to alert the rest of the team to what they see. But wouldn’t it be better if the rest of the team could see that information too, rather than just hear about it? Wouldn’t it be better to tie all these sensors together, to give the truck commander all the information his crew has so that he can make decisions quicker and with more confidence?

With the evolution of the improvised explosive device threat, the Army has seen a proliferation of independent control systems in the route clearance MMPV Type II crew compartments. These “vehicle enablers,” such as imaging sensors, weapon systems and communications equipment, come with their own proprietary and unique operator stations, which can be viewed and controlled only by the Soldiers assigned to them. All of these different operator stations limit room for future capability growth and create integration challenges. Even if all the stations could fit in one vehicle, they’d require too many displays for a single operator to view and control effectively.

To address these challenges in the forthcoming MMPV Type II program of record (POR), the U.S. Army Research, Development and Engineering Command’s Communications-Electronics Center (CERDEC), a subordinate organization to U.S. Army Materiel Command, partnered with the Product Manager for Assured Mobility Systems (PdM AMS) to rapidly develop a software and hardware architecture called the Multifunction Video Display (MVD). PdM AMS comes under the Army Project Office for Mine Resistant Ambush Protected Vehicles, assigned to the Program Executive Office (PEO) for Combat Support and Combat Service Support.

SPEED TEST To test for system latency—the delay between input and outcome—an oscilloscope compared the speed of the signal as measured directly from the initial event with raw video processed through the camera, media converter, server and display. Tests indicated that latency under full load was well within required specifications.

The MVD system efficiently distributes images and sensor control to all crew stations within a vehicle, resulting in a single touch-screen display for each crew station capable of viewing and controlling all vehicle enablers, and creating a seamless common interface across all enablers. This allows capability growth without increasing display size, weight and power (SWAP) requirements. Adding a new enabler no longer requires the addition of an enabler operator’s station. MVD technology is completely government-owned and -developed, is hardware-independent, enabling it to run on numerous platforms, and has a plug-and-play ­VICTORY (Vehicle Integration for C4ISR/EW [command, control, communications, computers, information, surveillance and reconnaissance/electronic warfare] Interoperability)-based architecture. The software can run on any platform.

EYES EVERYWHEREThe graphical user interface of the MVD system establishes a common monitor and interface to view and operate many simultaneous real-time video feeds. The system can also act as a digital video recorder, allowing for the capture and playback of video sequences and snapshots.

MULTIPLE EFFICIENCIES
MVD improves mission capability by increasing operator efficiency and situational awareness and reducing SWAP requirements. Operator efficiency improves first by keeping the operator focused on one display that presents him or her with an identical view of each vehicle enabler from the common user interface all the enablers share. Similarly, the training burden is reduced with consistency across operator controls. The operator has only one interface to learn and a common set of controls for all enablers, now and into the future.

Previously, full-motion video could only be viewed by a single crew member with the enabler’s dedicated display. With MVD, any crew member can view video from any or all enablers simultaneously and in real time. With additional eyes on each video feed, situational awareness increases proportionally. Finally, the single integrated MVD system obviates the need for dedicated processing and display hardware, reducing SWAP requirements.

MOVING INTO FOCUS An MVD plug-in enables use of high-magnification sensors, which means that crews can perform roadway and roadside threat detection at extended ranges while on the move.

AGGRESSIVE TIMELINE, AGGRESSIVE PLAN
The MVD project originated in a conversation between the CERDEC Night Vision and Electronic Sensors Directorate (NVESD) and PdM AMS at a forum hosted by the U.S. Army Engineer School related to capability production document (CPD) vehicle requirements for the MMPV Type II POR. The overall CPD required a common, intuitive display to view and control all vehicle enablers at all crew stations simultaneously in real time, with the capacity for future growth. NVESD had accomplished a related display effort called Multi-sensor Graphical User Interface, which could be augmented to meet that MMPV Type II single display requirement. The timeline for development was aggressive as the result of the MMPV Type II fielding schedule.

To be considered for insertion into the MMPV during its U.S. Army Test and Evaluation Center testing (currently ongoing), NVESD and PdM AMS had to demonstrate a working prototype system within six months, followed quickly by a six-month prototype refinement period to create a more ruggedized version.

As a first step, NVESD conducted an architecture study to determine how best to meet the overall project goal. NVESD identified three target system architectures. NVESD designed the software prototypes for each architecture and collaborated with hardware vendors to design the hardware prototypes that would demonstrate the architectures. Common to each approach was the need to convert the MMPV Type II legacy analog camera data to digital and then fit the data into the available bandwidth for each display. The aggregate bandwidth of all the different vehicle-enablers is roughly three times more than most common commercial off-the-shelf interfaces can handle.

PUTTING IT TOGETHER The system architecture used in the MVD system provides robust, distributed processing for redundancy, speed and room for future growth without the need for costly reconfigurations.

The three architectures varied mainly in where they collected imagery and how they disseminated it to the displays. A centralized architecture collected the images at a central server with dedicated image-capturing hardware that compressed the imagery and sent it out to the displays. A distributed architecture had image-capturing hardware in each display to capture a subset of the images, which it compressed and passed to the other displays. A network-centric approach used stand-alone media converters to capture the imagery and a server switch to compress it and send it to the displays.

The network-centric architecture was deemed the best of the three. It has ample hardware redundancy to survive various kinds of hardware failure as opposed to the centralized approach, which would be crippled by the failure of the central server. It minimizes the number of components required in the displays, keeping them thin and light for rapid vehicle ingress and egress. And, as the vehicle shifts away from analog sensors, the media converters can be removed and new digital sensors can tap directly into the server switch. Finally, this approach conforms to the Army’s move toward network connectedness with the introduction of the VICTORY standard for communicating between systems within a vehicle and the Integrated Sensor Architecture (ISA) for sharing information between sensors and systems in a tactical environment.

Over the course of the MVD system development, NVESD worked closely with multiple hardware vendors to transition each of the system architectural components from laboratory-grade prototypes to full military standard, conduction-cooled, production products capable of operating in the extreme environments of the MMPV Type II at minimal cost.

DELIVERING THE SYSTEM
The evolution of the system server switch set the stage for the entire MVD procurement strategy. After completing the initial system demonstrations, it was time for the ruggedized solution. While researching similar hardware acquisitions on other government projects, NVESD found that the ruggedized servers used by the Project Manager for the Warfighter Information Network – Tactical (PM WIN-T) met the needs of MVD almost perfectly. PM WIN-T, assigned to the PEO for Command, Control and Communications – Tactical (PEO C3T), was purchasing its servers using the Common Hardware Systems 4 contract of PEO C3T’s PM for Mission Command, a contract open to all DOD customers to procure tactical hardware and services. PdM AMS is testing this procurement mechanism, which would greatly reduce the time necessary to purchase hardware, for use with MVD.

TIGHT QUARTERS The current crew station includes separate displays for each of the enablers in use, including imaging sensors, weapon systems and communications equipment, limiting room for future capability growth and creating integration challenges.

A PATH FOR GROWTH
The MVD software is hardware-independent and operates on any of the three architectures with minor modifications. MVD design is novel in that it uses a modular plug-in-based architecture, which means that new enabler systems can be added without modifying or recompiling any of the existing code. This is a tremendous cost savings as the hybrid threat is continuously adapting to defeat-strategies, requiring new vehicle-enablers. MVD software comprises many thousands of lines of code that government personnel at NVESD authored quickly to meet the aggressive development schedule. The code has been through multiple rounds of static analysis as well as code coverage testing to ensure that every line operates as intended without errors. In addition, a mobile platform version of the system for Android devices will allow an operator to continue using enablers while dismounted from the vehicle.

The system uses industry standards for interfaces and data formats, including both VICTORY and ISA, enabling it to communicate with current and future systems internal and external to the vehicle platform. Along with image display, the MVD system can also act as a digital video recorder, allowing for the capture and playback of video sequences and snapshots. The MVD system currently allows for the full control of several of the MMPV Type II enablers and display of nine separate camera feeds. The system has demonstrated robustness in testing with 14 full-motion video feeds captured simultaneously and displayed in real time—nearly five times more enabler feeds than any single configuration of a typical MMPV Type II platform. This is the key demonstration that provided the assurance PdM AMS needed to select the MVD system as the display solution for its MMPV Type II POR.

With all enablers viewed and controlled through MVD and plenty of processing headroom, MVD has great potential for future growth into previously unreachable areas that use a number of separate enablers. For example, MVD contains a plug-in that can slew a high-magnification sensor to a specific spot simply by touching the wide field-of-view video displayed on another enabler, allowing operators to perform roadway and roadside threat detection at extended ranges while moving. MVD can also transform the outputs of all enablers into the same geospatial coordinate system and has the processing power to perform detection and tracking algorithms on them, which means it can be used algorithmically to aid operators in detecting threats.

ON A MISSION The CERDEC Night Vision and Electronic Sensors Directorate and the Product Manager for Assured Mobility Systems rapidly developed the Multifunction Video Display, a software and hardware architecture that distributes images and sensor control to all crew stations within the MMPV Type II, shown here performing roadside threat interrogation activity. (Photos and images courtesy of CERDEC)

CONCLUSION
With the multiple improvements it represents in capability, as well as the built-in processing headroom that provides for future capability growth, MVD was PdM AMS’ natural choice to be the display system in the MMPV Type II POR. It will improve communication within the MMPV Type II vehicle crew and decrease the time spent searching for suspected explosive hazards, allowing route clearance teams to become more efficient while keeping them safer when performing their mission.

This system has the potential to tap into many of the combat developers’ future capability production document programs and tie them together while improving the way that route clearance will be done in the future. The stovepiped method of adding new capabilities and sensors is gone, replaced by the “tablet-like” capability of the MVD. The benefits of the MVD system don’t stop there, either; MVD has the potential to affect all DOD ground vehicles with sensors by acting as the operator’s display, thereby achieving substantial SWAP reductions and saving money.

MR. SEAN JELLISH is the lead engineer on the MVD program at NVESD, Fort Belvoir, VA. He specializes in algorithm development, embedded processing, hardware and software architectures and mobile programming. He has an M.S. in electrical engineering and a B.S. in computer science and electrical engineering from the University of Virginia. He is Level III certified in systems engineering and is a member of the Army Acquisition Corps.

MR. BRIAN WILSON is the engineering team leader for the system integration of route clearance vehicle enablers at PdM AMS. He holds an M.S. in engineering management from the University of Michigan and a B.S. in mechanical engineering from University of Detroit Mercy. He is Level III certified in systems engineering and is a member of the Army Acquisition Corps.
This article was originally published in the July – September 2015 issue of Army AL&T magazine.
Subscribe to Access AL&T is the premier online news source for the Acquisition, Logistics, and Technology (AL&T) Workforce. Subscribe

FORT BELVOIR, Va. (July 15, 2015) – Open up your calendars: The Office of the Army, Director of Acquisition Career Management has scheduled a host of Army Acquisition Workforce (AAW) education, training and leadership development opportunities for FY16.

A handful of AAW leadership development opportunities are on the schedule, including four sections of the Acquisition Leader Challenge Program, a series of seminars that focus on developing leadership skills for civilians, identifying challenges for new leaders, and incorporating individual talents into a cohesive workforce. Applications will be accepted in August for the Competitive Development Group, a three-year developmental program for board-selected applicants that offers expanded training, leadership, experiential and other career development opportunities. Civilian workforce members can also take advantage of the opportunities offered through the Defense Civilian Emerging Leaders Program and the Senior Service College Fellowship, both of which will open for applications next year.

Ready for your next career challenge? Announcements open in mid-September for the Centrally Selected List/Centralized Selection Board, which fills billets for project and product managers as well as product directors. Maybe a hands-on experience is what you need for this stage of your career. Military members of the Army Acquisition Workforce might consider the Training With Industry program, which places competitively selected officers in corporate assignments, giving them extensive exposure to managerial techniques and industrial procedures. The program announcement opens July 23. Programs for 51C NCOs and FA-51 officers include Advanced Civil Schooling, which offers a number of sessions through FY16, and the Degree Completion Program, which opens for applications a year from now.

A complete list of the FY16 programs, including opening and closing dates, is below, and additional information can be found on the online calendar. To be sure you don’t miss an opportunity or a deadline, be sure to subscribe by clicking the button in the lower right-hand corner, which will populate your Outlook calendar with all the relevant information. Keep in mind that dates are subject to change, so be sure to check out the AAPDS tab within CAPPMIS to confirm.

Short tenure, lots of accolades

By Susan L. Follett

Ernest Keen has worked in Army acquisition for just two years, but in that time has managed to earn a handful of awards. “I think it’s because I’m willing to try new things, and I don’t usually say ‘no’ when someone asks for help,” said Keen, an aerospace engineer in the Concept Design and Assessment Tech Area for the Aviation and Missile Research, Development and Engineering Center’s Aviation Development Directorate.

For him, the most meaningful award was the FY14 Army Modeling and Simulation Award, which he earned as part of the Joint Multi-Role Technology Demonstration Modeling and Simulation Team. The joint effort is examining options to replace aging aircraft in the U.S. military fleet with new aircraft that fills technology gaps, and the team identified technology challenges ranging from configuration issues to interactional aerodynamics penalties. “There were a lot of people on our team and we all worked pretty hard,” he said, “and it was great to see everyone recognized for that.”

Keen worked for Navy acquisition before coming to the Army side of the process, and spent a few years working on tool and system development for small unmanned air systems before becoming a civil servant. “My experience on the commercial side was that the exposure was somewhat narrow: working on a small component of a subsystem, for example. But civil service offers more opportunity for broader exposure to all parts of a system, and that’s what attracted me to the work.”

What do you do in the Army? Why is it important?
As an Army civil servant working on vehicle conceptual design and assessment, I’m a vehicle designer, mass properties engineer and tool developer. Our tech area leads multidisciplinary design of advanced vertical lift aviation systems for manned and unmanned platforms. We enable the enterprise to formulate new concepts of operation, establish feasible requirements, make informed technology investments and satisfy materiel solutions analysis and development milestones.

What has your experience been like? What has surprised you the most?
My experience working for the Army has been fantastic, both in terms of the people I work with, and the opportunities available to me. I am proud to work with the Concept Design and Assessment Tech Area, and I enjoy the challenge of working in a continually evolving field. I have been surprised by the depth of organic technical expertise within the Army’s research and development engineering centers.

Why did you join the Army? What is your greatest satisfaction in being part of the Army?
I became an Army civil servant because I wanted to apply my training and effort toward ensuring our Soldiers have the technologies needed to remain the best fighting force in the world. My greatest satisfaction is seeing our work products make an impact in future planning.

You were one of the winners of the inaugural Maj. Gen. Harold J. “Harry” Greene Award for Acquisition Writing, in the category of innovation, and your entry outlined new paradigms that encourage technology insertion via short iterative cycles focused on technical learning with elevated risk tolerance. What prompted you to enter? What was your reaction to the news that you’d won?
A couple things prompted me to enter. One was the opportunity for personal growth—to see if I could articulate my personal ideas as a way of bettering myself. Another reason I entered was a desire to see the acquisition process improve. Most of what we do is in the early part of the life cycle—requirements development, before Milestone A—and I think it’s important to have all of the different perspectives contribute to the dialog about improving the process. I was surprised to find out that I’d won: I knew that a lot of the other entries dealt with the later phases of acquisition—building systems and systems development, for example—and that the other entrants had a lot more experience than me. It was very gratifying to be chosen.

What advice would you give to someone who wants to be where you are?
Learn as much as you can from every experience. And appreciate the fact that whatever the task, someone has probably done it before you. Capitalize on that: ask for help, and incorporate the knowledge and experience of others.

“Faces of the Force” is an online series highlighting members of the Army Acquisition Workforce through the power of individual stories. Profiles are produced by the U.S. Army Acquisition Support Center Communication and Support Branch, working closely with public affairs officers to feature Soldiers and Civilians currently serving in a variety of AL&T disciplines. For more information, or to nominate someone, please contact 703-805-1006.

Subscribe to Access AL&T is the premier online news source for the Acquisition, Logistics, and Technology (AL&T) Workforce. Subscribe

Acquisition professionals are tasked to manage their program’s cost, schedule and performance. In many cases, managing performance can be the most challenging. This is because the program office not only manages the specifics that determine and define their capability’s requirements, but also maintains a relationship with the organization that manages and “owns” the capability’s requirement documents. That organization is the U.S. Army Training and Doctrine Command (TRADOC) Capability Manager (TCM). These requirement documents, the initial capabilities document (ICD), capability development document (CDD) and the capability production document (CPD) are what define the characteristics and performance parameters of a capability or materiel solution.

Despite the best of situations, many barriers exist when developing, fielding and sustaining a capability. Even in the early phases of capability development, a plethora of events occur that require cooperation and communication between acquisition professionals and capability managers. This coordination is necessary to shepherd a document through the wickets of the Joint Capabilities Integrated Development System (JCIDS) process for it to become a program of record (POR).

One challenge facing project and program management offices (PMOs) is the lack of resources needed to work these early stages because the Army will not resource many activities without an approved requirement. Arguably, however, a more challenging set of circumstances has been occurring in PMOs Armywide as program and project managers (PMs) transition their offices to meet the demands of shifting priorities and resources in a budget constrained environment. For several years, the Army has been adjusting to new and emerging strategic, operational and financial environments based on changes in national security and national defense strategies.

‘GOLDEN’ VEHICLE SFC Carlos Shell, liaison officer for the Capability Package Directorate, inspects a newly integrated, one-of-a-kind “golden” vehicle with Ramon Gandea, program manager, Warfighter Information Network – Tactical, at the NIE Integration Motor Pool, February 6. Not all materiel is golden: A manager needs resources to create an approved requirement for a desired capability, but resources are often unavailable without an approved requirement. (Photo by Theotis Clemons, NIE Plans)

THE PROBLEM
The wars in Iraq and Afghanistan created several operational challenges that required the Army to field Quick Reaction Capabilities (QRCs) in response to operational needs statements (ONS) and joint urgent operational need statements (JUONS). Resultantly, many Soldiers’ lives were saved and capability gaps and associated risks were significantly mitigated. The goal of these solutions was to get sufficient capability to the war­fighter as quickly as possible. The logic was that the quicker the capability was delivered, the more lives would be saved and the more success our warfighters would meet on the battlefield.

The upside to this process was that, without question, lives were saved and most missions were successful. The downside to this process is manifold, however. First and foremost, the analytical rigor and documented processes that are generally used to develop, manufacture, test, deliver and sustain materiel solutions were often not used in response to ONS and JUONS. QRCs were quickly procured from industry and sent down-range with little regard to cost, integration, testing or sustainment.

These solutions were often fielded as pilot programs without acquisition management. QRCs were funded using contingency dollars that did not include sustainment money. Resultantly, many QRCs were either left in theater, destroyed or stored away for future use. Yet Army leadership has deemed some materiel solutions to be enduring capabilities and be managed in the respective PMO. These organizations are transitioning many of these QRCs to PORs in order to secure sustainment dollars not appropriated in contingency funding.

NEW AMMO Kori Phillips, a project engineer with the Joint Service Small Arms Program, holds the new and lighter M249 rounds in her right hand and the current rounds in her left. The modified M249, known as the Cased Telescoped Light Machine Gun, is shown below and between her hands. Phillips’ exhibit was part of a media day at Picatinny Arsenal, NJ, May 4. Getting from a current capability or solution to a future one requires ICDs, CDDs and CPDs, which define the characteristics and performance parameters of a capability or materiel solution. (Photo by David Vergun)

As a result, PMs are responsible for creating documents and processes that would be required for a validated and funded program to proceed through the acquisition process. These products and documents must be generated so senior leaders can assess the capability and resource sustainment dollars accordingly. What drives and directs this rigorous process, from start to finish, are the requirements documented by the TCMs. The Army must have a valid need for the capability. Requirements spell out this need and must be integrated into the acquisition process.

DEFINING ‘REQUIREMENT’
Many PMOs face challenges in managing their requirements because, over the past several years, business has been conducted with a fundamentally different perspective of what exactly defines a requirement. The word alone has different meanings for different people in the acquisition workforce. In the past, when responding to an ONS, a requirement meant getting a generally defined capability to the user. General and generic system characteristics such as size, electromagnetic hardening, ruggedness and weight were not a priority or a requirement when providing a solution to the end-user.

ONS and JUONS also do not have basis of issue plans (BOIPs) or a designated military occupational specialty, which are needed for a solution to transition to an enduring or institutional capability. This means that TCMs and PMs must closely coordinate to document the BOIP and ensure the capability is delivered to units accordingly. This process is time consuming and requires significant logistic planning and effort. Furthermore, as PMOs transition to PORs, they are responsible for managing TRADOC-­generated performance requirements, which are more defined with key performance parameters and key system attributes. With a capability already in the hands of the user, the transition from general to specific makes satisfying these requirements costly and difficult.

Another consequence of the ONS process is the increased risk of capability managers and document writers basing their requirement documents (in part, at least) on an existing materiel solution or capability. Much like the PM trying to catch up to the process to secure funding to sustain a capability, the TCM tries to tailor requirement documents to an existing materiel solution that once satisfied an ONS.

This technique and practice is fundamentally flawed as it puts the writer into a vacuum, isolated from the PM’s input. The PM’s input when documenting requirements is in fact necessary to ensure the end-product is achievable. Furthermore, stakeholders who do not understand acquisitions or the requirement validation process can sometimes have disruptive influences on the requirements documentation process. Similarly, if a materiel solution was developed under an Army functional proponent, roles and responsibilities must be realigned when the capability transitions to a POR. Any single one of these practices creates the risk of documenting requirements that are not feasible, affordable or sustainable. The resultant document thus becomes a wish list to improvements in an existing capability, not an attainable response to a validated capability requirement that is generally derived from a documented concept and capability gap. Requirements must be traceable from validated concept through materiel development.

SAFETY FIRST Patrick A. LeBlanc, Army Field Support Battalion-Afghanistan safety officer, right, looks on as CPT Audrey J. Dean, center, 1st Theater Sustainment Command deputy safety officer and radiation safety officer, and SFC Teng Xiong-White, 4th Resolute Support Sustainment Brigade radiation safety officer, complete paperwork that will accompany Advanced Combat Optical Gunsights, mortar scopes and other equipment that uses radioactive tritium as a constant light source as it is shipped to the Army Dosimetry Center at Redstone Arsenal, AL. In addition to performance, materiel solutions and capabilities have a spectrum of other requirements. (Photo by Summer Barkley)

THE SOLUTION
Very early in professional development, Army leaders are taught how to clearly identify a problem as the first task in problem solving. Knowing the dynamics of a problem enhances a leader’s ability to scope the issue, understand the risk, allocate resources, develop courses of action and execute. In providing capability to the warfighter, it is the role of leadership at the PM and TCM to identify any problems that prevent their organizations from working through requirement-related issues. It is imperative for leaders to chart the path to success from concept to end item. This is achieved through coordinated action between the TCM and the PM by developing, delivering and sustaining a capability to the end user. This involves not just giving the warfighter something, but giving the warfighter something that is defined and associated with the problems and barriers in their current or future operating environments.

Much like an operational organization, the command climate and command philosophy have significant effects on how the members of the PM and TCM interrelate. With that, leadership at both offices must communicate openly and nurture a productive and positive relationship with action officers and document writers.

REQUIREMENT: REQUIREMENTS Vigilant Pursuit provides dedicated tactical pursuit vehicle-mounted and dismounted assets that employ cutting-edge technologies, enabling signals- and human-intelligence Soldiers to cross-tip and cross-cue timely intelligence to more rapidly and accurately identify high-value targets. Whether it’s a vehicle or a cutting-edge system within it, all material solutions and capabilities in a program of record have the requirement for requirements. (Photo by Kashia Simmons)

The relationship between the two organizations cannot be exclusive to leadership because very often leaders rely heavily on the experience and advice of senior capability managers and assistant PMs. These individuals have often been in the management offices since the capability was conceived and have significant influence and knowledge. The first step in establishing this cross-organization relationship is face-to-face interaction, which is imperative in any interpersonal encounter. Video teleconferences (VTC) are worthy, but a temporary duty trip to the TCM or PMO can pay huge dividends and avoid confusion, miscommunication, wasted labor and time. Simply put, leaders need to work together and “troop the line” between TCMs, PMs and stakeholders to ensure the war­fighter is getting the right equipment that is operationally sustainable and on time.

Whether a program is just kicking off, bending metal, in final tests or in sustainment, the importance of effective written and verbal communication cannot be underscored enough. Effective communication is one of the most important characteristics of any relationship. The development of requirements is a complex process in which concepts, technology, industry capacity and cost are extensively analyzed and documented. This time-consuming method creates a train of thought exclusive and unique to many capability managers.

CONCLUSION
Documenting Army “needs” is no small or easy task. It takes training. There is very little room for ambiguity when describing and documenting materiel solution attributes and characteristics. This particular way of thinking and communicating creates a lexicon within the capability management community that is often a barrier for counterparts in the PMO. Leaders must identify issues like this and take measures to mitigate their effects. Online training, VTC working lunches and other knowledge-sharing exercises can reduce the effects of cultural differences between the TCM and PMO.

Many PMOs and TCMs are going through the transition from QRC to POR. This change may be tumultuous and it will require Army professionals to adjust how they conduct business, interact and communicate with others and fulfill their role in support of the user. Ultimately, it is our job to care about the Soldiers’ problems because they do not have time to worry about ours. Effective communication leads to getting capability to the warfighter, which is everyone’s responsibility, because we never want to send our Soldiers into a fair fight.

SOFT LANDER The Advanced Cargo Parachute Release System, developed by Product Manager Force Sustainment Systems at Natick Soldier Systems Center, MA, should help valuable cargo loads arrive intact on the battlefield. As the Army adjusts to new and emerging strategic, operational and financial environments, those with the responsibility to equip the Soldier must adjust as well. (Photo by Rob Hawley, NSRDEC Strategic Communications)

MAJ TIMOTHY J. BRACKEN is an aviation branch officer and assistant program manager for Project Management Office DOD Biometrics, where he manages foreign military sales. He worked three years at the Aviation Center of Excellence in the Capability Development Integration Directorate before acceptance into the Acquisition Corps in 2013. He holds an M.A. in history from the University of North Carolina, Wilmington and a B.A. in history from the University of Tennessee at Knoxville. He is Level I certified in program management.

ABERDEEN PROVING GROUND, Md. — The Army recently began fielding a network communications system that provides real-time, in-flight situational awareness to commanders and paratroopers to better support forcible entry operations from takeoff to jump.

The Enroute Mission Command Capability, or EMC2, came about by way of a government-to-government development partnership that produced a ruggedized network and workspace solution for the C-17 aircraft.

“When we received the EMC2 requirements from the Army, we knew we would require specialized engineering support to quickly build what is essentially a flying command post,” said. Lt. Col. Joel Babbitt, product manager for Warfighter Information Network-Tactical Increment 1, or WIN-T, which manages EMC2. “We immediately reached out to our partners in the rapid prototyping and integration community.”

WIN-T teamed with the Army’s Research, Development and Engineering Command’s communications-electronics center, or CERDEC. The center’s Command, Power and Integration Directorate led the effort for CERDEC and leveraged its C4ISR Prototype Integration Facility to complete the requirements.

Soldiers configure the communications systems housed within ruggedized transit cases to allow in-flight secure network access and mission command for increased situational awareness, as part of the Enroute Mission Command Capability (EMC2) demonstration on May 14, 2015 at Pope Army Air Field, Fort Bragg, N.C.
(U.S. Army photo by Amy Walker, PEO C3T)

“Our partners in WIN-T sent us the EMC2 engineering requirements in November 2013, and in nine months we delivered,” said Christopher Manning, chief, CERDEC CP&I Prototyping, Integration and Testing Division.

The task included creating and delivering robust communications and transit cases to house radios, power supplies, and Internet capabilities for mission command applications and Secure Voice Over Internet Protocol required for phone calls, chat and email.

One critical transit case was designated for the Key-leader Extension Node, or KEN.

“The KEN is a mobile hot spot that includes everything required to connect to the Internet and reach back to the unit’s homestation while on the C-17,” said James Shannon, CERDEC EMC2 project lead.

Each communications and transit case had to meet stringent standards for mobility, functionality and strength.

First, they had to conform to a four-man weight lift limit per military standards even though they are wheeled. Second, the communications equipment could not produce electromagnetic interference with other command and control or airplane systems. Finally, the cases had to withstand the sometimes powerful vibration that occurs inside the C-17.

“We tested all communications capabilities with WIN-T, but to conform to strict Air Force C-17 airworthy standards, we employed our environmental test lab to create conditions specific to in-flight conditions,” Shannon said. “By testing for a variety of environmental issues, such as vibration, temperature, humidity, altitude, and shock, we are able to identify and rectify many issues before our customers conduct their own tests.”

Another major system requirement was to create a workspace for paratroopers and their laptops that provided Internet connectivity and physical stability while also leaving ample floor space to prepare for a jump. CERDEC engineers’ modular workstation design configures for up to seven users, connects to the Ethernet, securely ties down to the floor of the C-17 and partially collapses to create a clear exit path.

To ensure the workstation remained secure throughout the flight, engineers conducted a pull-test that mimicked the gravitational pull a C-17 endures during takeoff and landing.

The 50th Expeditionary Signal Battalion, 35th Signal Brigade, which supports the XVIII Airborne Corp’s Global Response Force, or GRF, recently demonstrated EMC2 aboard a C-17 at Pope Army Air Field, Fort Bragg, North Carolina. The demonstration included establishing the entire EMC2 configuration from beginning to end.

“The system is built and configured in a way that makes it ideal for expeditionary missions,” said 1st Lt. Michael Laquet, 50th ESB platoon leader, who oversees the operation and maintenance of the EMC2 equipment. “Thanks to its modular design, we can deploy a package tailored to the mission quickly and easily, and after only one training session, my Soldiers were able to install the system in under an hour.”

One of the most critical capabilities using EMC2 is the paratrooper’s ability to watch live full motion video feeds of their drop zones. Derived from unmanned aerial vehicles, paratroopers can view threats on the ground right up to their jump. Additional upgrades for the EMC2 include separate video screens configured to hook directly onto the workstations, providing Soldiers with an up-close view of operational information.

EMC2, now referred to as the Army’s “flying command post,” has greatly reduced the unknowns that paratroopers can face during their often dangerous decent to the ground. The planned enhancements will further decrease these risks.

“Our engineers are already working with WIN-T on future iterations of EMC2, including nodes for key leaders and support staff flying in multiple aircraft,” Manning said. “For us, a ‘win’ is when we transition something to our customers, but the real winners are the Soldiers who obtain these critical capabilities sooner rather than later.”

A Soldier accesses her laptop using the modular workspace that folds create an unobstructed pathway for paratroopers to exit the plane, as part of the Enroute Mission Command Capability (EMC2) demonstration on May 14, 2015 at Pope Army Air Field, Fort Bragg, N.C. EMC2 provides in-flight network communications and mission command to increase the situational awareness of the Global Response Force.
(U.S. Army photo by Amy Walker, PEO C3T)

The Communications-Electronics Research, Development and Engineering Center is part of the U.S. Army Research, Development and Engineering Command, which has the mission to develop technology and engineering solutions for America’s Soldiers.

RDECOM is a major subordinate command of the U.S. Army Materiel Command. AMC is the Army’s premier provider of materiel readiness–technology, acquisition support, materiel development, logistics power projection and sustainment–to the total force, across the spectrum of joint military operations. If a Soldier shoots it, drives it, flies it, wears it, eats it or communicates with it, AMC provides it.

Subscribe to Access AL&T is the premier online news source for the Acquisition, Logistics, and Technology (AL&T) Workforce. Subscribe

An increase in the Unmanned Threat Emitter System (UMTE) workload in the Single Threat Systems Section and the depot reorganization dictated a move to a new location last July to augment production. UMTEs provide realistic tactical training for combat aircrews, Air Force pilots can practice their tactics before encountering threats in actual combat.

The 10-member UMTE team, struggling after the move with a lack of ample space for work and storage, recognized the need to set things in order to better serve warfighters. By bringing in process improvement specialists Eric Dial and Bob Reese from the Continuous Process Improvement Directorate, the team gained important insight.

The pair coached the team to develop ideas and make decisions based on time-proven 6S techniques.

Improvements to the Air Force Unmanned Threat Emitter System workload at Tobyhanna Army Depot led to improved workflow and tracking of assets, hardware and supplies. Photo Credit: Mr. Steve Grzezdzinski (CECOM)

“This team took charge and made the right decisions,” said Reese. “Each member contributed. They recognized what they had to do and made it happen.”

The team set the analysis in motion working in the shop area, creating a labor intensive hands-on effort to incorporate their ideas for improvement.

“Our team seemed to have great synergy right from the start and worked well together throughout the entire event,” said subject matter expert Thomas Chernasky. “We were able to achieve all of our objectives.”

Deconstructing the outmoded workspace, then piecing it together using a step-by-step visual management process, the team established an efficient flow for incoming and outgoing products, eliminated clutter and trip hazards, organized storage space, removed excess inventory, and taped off multiple work cells to increase production.

“To date, we’ve been able to sustain the improvements which led to improved workflow and helped substantially with locating our assets, hardware and various supplies,” Chernasky added.

Prior to the event the team didn’t have enough space — only three or four systems were able to be worked. After the event, they have more capacity — eight systems are in production at any given time. Other managers are now asking for similar help.

Tobyhanna Army Depot is a recognized leader in providing world-class logistics support for command, control, communications, computers, intelligence, surveillance and reconnaissance systems across the Department of Defense. Tobyhanna’s Corporate Philosophy, dedicated work force and electronics expertise ensure the depot is the Joint C4ISR provider of choice for all branches of the Armed Forces and industry partners.

Tobyhanna’s unparalleled capabilities include full-spectrum logistics support for sustainment, overhaul and repair, fabrication and manufacturing, engineering design and development, systems integration, post production software support, technology insertion, modification, foreign military sales and global field support to our Joint Warfighters.

About 3,100 personnel are employed at Tobyhanna, which is located in the Pocono Mountains of northeastern Pennsylvania. Tobyhanna Army Depot is part of the U.S. Army Communications-Electronics Command. Headquartered at Aberdeen Proving Ground, Maryland, the command’s mission is to research, develop, acquire, field and sustain communications, command, control computer, intelligence, electronic warfare and sensors capabilities for the Armed Forces.

Subscribe to Access AL&T is the premier online news source for the Acquisition, Logistics, and Technology (AL&T) Workforce. Subscribe

]]>http://asc.army.mil/web/access-acq-army-civilian-lean-event-increases-output-for-air-force-trainer/feed/0Army needs one ‘solid network’ to protect against cyber threatshttp://asc.army.mil/web/access-army-needs-one-solid-network-to-protect-against-cyber-threats/
http://asc.army.mil/web/access-army-needs-one-solid-network-to-protect-against-cyber-threats/#commentsFri, 10 Jul 2015 14:34:09 +0000http://asc.army.mil/web/?p=18711WASHINGTON (Army News Service, July 9th, 2015) — From computers and laptops, to smartphones and tablets, being “in the know” is the baseline for effective organization and leadership.

In today’s Army, mission command means effective communication across all commands, mediums and environments that is pervasive, protected and utilized to greatest efficiency, said Army leaders during a discussion sponsored by the Association of the United States Army, or AUSA, July 9.

“Mission command is fundamental to assuring our Army stays strong,” said Brig Gen. John A. George, director of capabilities development for the Army Capabilities Integration Center. “We need an integrated and coordinated management system to drive that operation.”

Army leaders gathered in Arlington, Va., July 9, 2015, for an Association of the United States Army-sponsored discussion regarding prospects for advancement of the Army’s online, network communication. (Photo Credit: Lora Strum)

The Better Buying Power, or BBP, program’s focus on cost reduction and resource attainment has made an important difference in how the Army cultivates new technology to meet ever-increasing standards of productivity and security, said Lt. Gen. Michael E. Williamson, the principal military deputy to the assistant secretary of the Army for acquisition, logistics and technology.

“With the access to technology our adversaries have, it becomes imperative we look at promising tech and create a mechanism for the Army to interact with industry partners to both help and, at least demonstrate, a significant interest in certain areas,” Williamson said.

What this looks like, for Williamson, is crafting one solid network that is protected from adversaries. By centralizing resources in one place, the Army can avoid overloading servers with multiple protections and instead lock down one system from enemy threats, Williamson said. Eliminating the existing bureaucracy of networks would allow for a more robust and resilient system that could withstand the instability of cyber environments.

“Our enemies have access to technology they’ve never had before,” Williamson said. “It’s an opportunity for them to communicate as well as to stop us [from communicating].”

In addition to providing a block against cyber attacks, a singular network would, for George, enable greater Army efficiency. Working closely with data analysts and applications, George has witnessed the power of coordinated data collection as it expedites mundane tasks to tackle even greater challenges.

“The network provides more than beans and bullets and where your next location is. The network is an enabler,” George said.

An Army network, which is intuitive, cohesive and accessible regardless of location, device or user, is imperative for creating a stronger mission command.

Brig Gen. Willard M. Burleson, director of the Mission Command Center of Excellence, commented on the importance of network access for all of the Army’s NATO allies, including extending support beyond the 29 members already participating.

“We don’t fight alone anymore, we fight as coalitions and we’ve got to work with our partners,” Burleson said.

With a focus on cost reduction, increased resiliency and robustness of the existing network, and a forward-thinking attitude, panelists acknowledged communication as one of the Army’s chief strengths.

“One of our enduring capabilities giving us an advantage over our enemies is our ability to procure and disseminate information,” Williamson said.

Held at the Crystal Gateway Marriott in Arlington, Virginia, the AUSA “Hot Topics” forum provided members of the Army, the tech industry and academia with a chance to discuss their interrelated fields.

FORT BELVOIR, Va. (July 8, 2015) — The Army moved closer to releasing its long-awaited solicitation for a new, modern handgun system when it hosted a fourth industry day for interested vendors at Picatinny Arsenal, New Jersey, July 8.

The Army named the new weapon the “XM17″ Modular Handgun System. It will replace the current M9 standard Army handgun with a more state-of-the-art weapon system.

Federal procurement restrictions do not allow the disclosure of the names of firms participating, she said.

The government presented changes to its latest draft solicitation for the XM17, which were posted to the Federal Business Opportunities website, June 8.

Among changes discussed at the industry day was policy that now opens up the competition to rounds other than ball (full metal jacket) ammunition.

A representative from the Army Judge Advocate General’s Office discussed the decision in detail during the event.

Richard Jackson, special assistant to the U.S. Army Judge Advocate General for Law of War, told attendees that federal, state, local and military law enforcement elements routinely use expanding and fragmenting ammunition in their handguns due to the increased capability it provides against threats.

“Expanding the XM17 Modular Handgun competition to include special-purpose ammunition will provide the warfighter with a more accurate and lethal handgun,” Jackson said. “Other types of ammunition allow the XM17 Modular Handgun System to be optimized by vendors, providing a more capable system to warfighters across the spectrum of shooter experience and skill level.”

Through the upcoming competition, the Army intends to replace the M9 with a more modern handgun system.

Sgt. Dave Salvador, of 75th Medical Company Area Support, South Korea, shoots his M9 during the Stress Shoot Qualification Lane of the Pacific Regional Medical Command Best Medic Competition, Sept. 21-25, 2014, at Schofield Barracks, Hawaii. The Army is looking for a new pistol to replace the M9.

“Handgun technology has advanced significantly thanks to lighter-weight materials, ergonomics and accessory rails since 1986, when the M9 entered the Army’s inventory,” Dawson said. “The Army is seeking a handgun system that outperforms the current M9 system. It also must be modular, meaning it allows adjustments to fit all hand sizes.”

The Army is encouraging industry to optimize commercially available gun, ammunition and magazine components to provide a system for maximum performance.

Current plans call for the Army to purchase more than 280,000 of the new handguns from a single vendor. Deliveries are scheduled to begin in 2018.

The Army also plans to buy approximately 7,000 compact versions of the new handgun.

Dawson said that other military services, participating in the XM17 program, may order an additional 212,000 systems above the Army quantity.

The draft solicitation spells out likely procedural and schedule details that responding vendors will have to follow to participate in the competition.

Subscribe to Access AL&T is the premier online news source for the Acquisition, Logistics, and Technology (AL&T) Workforce. Subscribe